Imran Khan vs Muttiah Muralitharan

[subshakerz]

He's got twice as many wickets without minnows as Imran. That's a nonstarter.

Struggling away vs the best batting lineups is an actual criticism. He's not flawless. But he makes up for it by taking 6WPM. Very comparable if we ignore the total wicket tally.

Again, I am fine with that argument, but then logically he should be ahead of all pacers as well, no?

 

[Xix2565]

Again, I am fine with that argument, but then logically he should be ahead of all pacers as well, no?

Not necessarily. You could say X pacer has certain attributes you value over Murali and vice versa. The logic is only between the specific players, not types of players.

 

[Bolo.]

Again, I am fine with that argument, but then logically he should be ahead of all pacers as well, no?

For me, yes.

It comes back to the point I made to you the other day about putting him between 2 somewhat comparable quicks if not. You could certainly make an argument for putting him behind someone like Hadlee with WPM that isn't that much lower than Murali, but ahead of others.

 

[subshakerz]

For me, yes.

It comes back to the point I made to you the other day about putting him between 2 somewhat comparable quicks if not. You could certainly make an argument for putting him behind someone like Hadlee with WPM that isn't that much lower than Murali, but ahead of others.

Steyn has a very good WPM too. Guess to me it seems arbitrary to put between except for someone like Lillee who has no SC record really.

 

[Bolo.]

Steyn has a very good WPM too. Guess to me it seems arbitrary to put between except for someone like Lillee who has no SC record really.

Comparing a spinner to a quick is always going to be a bit arbitrary. Wickets vs effectiveness when times are tough.

He was better in relation to other spinners than any quick was in relation to other quicks. And more valuable than any quick.

 

[subshakerz]

Comparing a spinner to a quick is always going to be a bit arbitrary. Wickets vs effectiveness when times are tough.

He was better in relation to other spinners than any quick was in relation to other quicks. And more valuable than any quick.

This is debatable.

To put it in perspective, SL has not even won a single test in India or Australia, much less won a series. Not even when they had Murali and their strongest ever team. These two countries are wastelands for SL.

If SL had a worldclass pacer who was good enough to do that, why wouldnt that be more valuable for SL cricket?

 

[smash84]

This is debatable.

To put it in perspective, SL has not even won a single test in India or Australia, much less drawn or win a series. Not even when they had Murali and their strongest ever team. These two countries are final frontiers for SL.

If SL had a worldclass pacer who was good enough to do that, why wouldnt that be more valuable for SL cricket?

Wait, SL have never even won a single test in India?

 

[subshakerz]

Wait, SL have never even won a single test in India?

Yup. And they are pretending Murali failing there is not a big deal.

India vs Sri Lanka Head To Head Test match team series results | ESPNcricinfo

Find India vs Sri Lanka Head To Head Test match at ESPNcricinfo. Records and stats of India vs Sri Lanka Head To Head Test match.

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[smash84]

Yup. And they are pretending Murali failing there is not a big deal.

India vs Sri Lanka Head To Head Test match team series results | ESPNcricinfo

Find India vs Sri Lanka Head To Head Test match at ESPNcricinfo. Records and stats of India vs Sri Lanka Head To Head Test match.

www.espncricinfo.com

Well, tbf, winning a series, in vast majority of cases, is not a single handed venture. It is a team effort. I don't think SL not winning a series in India has much to do with Murali. It would be like penalizing Shakib for BD not winning any series.

 

[subshakerz]

Well, tbf, winning a series, in vast majority of cases, is not a single handed venture. It is a team effort. I don't think SL not winning a series in India has much to do with Murali. It would be like penalizing Shakib for BD not winning any series.

You're right I wouldnt dock him for not winning a series. I am for SL never winning a test in these countries.

 

[shortpitched713]

Again, I am fine with that argument, but then logically he should be ahead of all pacers as well, no?

He's got pros and cons which make him different, not necessarily better or worse than any particular ATG seamer.

I rate Steyn super highly, and saw both him and Murali as basically equally potent weapons to have in your side. Steyn, of course could bring you greater consistency across conditions of home/away as a seamer and also could be a better "clutch wicket" bowler, situationally.

However, Murali had greater wicket totals per match, and I think generally was the prime reason a match was won, more often. Even forgetting longevity/career length, I think in a given 2,3 year period Murali would be that match winning contributor on more occasions, and thats why I generally have Murali just a shade over Steyn, in my book.

 

[subshakerz]

I rate Steyn super highly, and saw both him and Murali as basically equally potent weapons to have in your side. Steyn, of course could bring you greater consistency across conditions of home/away as a seamer and also could be a better "clutch wicket" bowler, situationally.

However, Murali had greater wicket totals per match, and I think generally was the prime reason a match was won, more often. Even forgetting longevity/career length, I think in a given 2,3 year period Murali would be that match winning contributor on more occasions, and thats why I generally have Murali just a shade over Steyn, in my book.

I get your point but I remember Steyn taking 5 wickets a game in his prime and I would rate that ahead of Murali in his peak.

Around 20 percent of his wickets were against minnows which boosts his WPM a lot. And unlike Murali, Steyn could win you a game at any time of the match, and could set your up with a win on Day 1. Murali more factored into a game day 3 onwards when the match was already mostly set, which is why Murali averages 26 in the 1st innings.

And again, can Murali win me a game against the best away? Not really. Against the rest though I would say Murali is more consistent and wouldnt have shockers like Steyn.

 

[shortpitched713]

He was better in relation to other spinners than any quick was in relation to other quicks. And more valuable than any quick.

I think McGrath compares favorably to Murali for two reasons

1) Longevity is a virtual wash between the 2, which none of the other "big 5" pacers can boast in relation to Murali
2) He was so damn consistent everywhere in all conditions and from match to match even in relation to other quicks of his time, be it Wasim, Ambrose, Donald, or whomever. It was a downright robotic level, which to me means he has a match effecting ability beyond any other fast bowler I ever extensively watched (didn't unfortunately get to watch Maco live, but he also didn't have longivity to this level).

 

[Bolo.]

This is debatable.

To put it in perspective, SL has not even won a single test in India or Australia, much less won a series. Not even when they had Murali and their strongest ever team. These two countries are wastelands for SL.

If SL had a worldclass pacer who was good enough to do that, why wouldnt that be more valuable for SL cricket?

SL were outclassed in India and AUS. An ATG quick might have won them a game or 2, but not a substantial amount.

SL lose a higher number elsewhere-any quick is a substantial downgrade on a match by match and career basis. He has basically an identical number of wickets in wins to Steyns career. Matches are getting lost either through worse performances or fielding a worse bowler.

 

[Bolo.]

I think McGrath compares favorably to Murali for two reasons

1) Longevity is a virtual wash between the 2, which none of the other "big 5" pacers can boast in relation to Murali
2) He was so damn consistent everywhere in all conditions and from match to match even in relation to other quicks of his time, be it Wasim, Ambrose, Donald, or whomever. It was a downright robotic level, which to me means he has a match effecting ability beyond any other fast bowler I ever extensively watched (didn't unfortunately get to watch Maco live, but he also didn't have longivity to this level).

Several of the top quicks have similar longevity in years. Not in amount bowled (and wickets) though. Mcgrath is closest, but he's still a long way off.

It's not just a question of being fit to bowl this much. It's doing a lot of donkey overs to set bats at bad times for bowling. If Murali was picking when he got to bowl to the same degree as most of the quicks, his record would be even prettier.

 

[Slifer]

All I know is this, I don't have a dog in this debate really but given the choice between a top class pacer vs spinner I'm going with the pacer all day.

Having played some cricket myself when i was younger I tended to regard spinners the same way Sehwag did. And I honestly had very little issues facing them; I had well enough reaction time to do what I needed to to either get them away for runs or to defend. But vs pacers, didn't have the same amount of time to react. And then there's the self preservation and not trying to get hurt.

India for my lifetime, has always had decent to great spinners and have always been tough to beat at home. Ashwin and Jadeja have taken that to a whole other level but in general, they've done nothing radically new. But Bumrah, Jasprit Bumrah is a problem for batting lineups regardless of where India plays and has made India a threat worldwide. Going into the series away to Rsa, Australia, Nz and Eng, India aren't the push overs they used to be because of Bumrah (and his fellow pacemen).

 

[ankitj]

Again, I am fine with that argument, but then logically he should be ahead of all pacers as well, no?

He is in my rankings

 

[kyear2]

All I know is this, I don't have a dog in this debate really but given the choice between a top class pacer vs spinner I'm going with the pacer all day.

Having played some cricket myself when i was younger I tended to regard spinners the same way Sehwag did. And I honestly had very little issues facing them; I had well enough reaction time to do what I needed to to either get them away for runs or to defend. But vs pacers, didn't have the same amount of time to react. And then there's the self preservation and not trying to get hurt.

India for my lifetime, has always had decent to great spinners and have always been tough to beat at home. Ashwin and Jadeja have taken that to a whole other level but in general, they've done nothing radically new. But Bumrah, Jasprit Bumrah is a problem for batting lineups regardless of where India plays and has made India a threat worldwide. Going into the series away to Rsa, Australia, Nz and Eng, India aren't the push overs they used to be because of Bumrah (and his fellow pacemen).

Fully agree with the bolded bit.

Also agree that a top tier paver over a top tier spinner all day.

But two points, 1) these two were special, and I have four and a half top tier pacers. So they slot in right after.
I would take prime Ambrose over either. Entire career? They slightly shade him for me.

 

[subshakerz]

Fully agree with the bolded bit.

Also agree that a top tier paver over a top tier spinner all day.

But two points, 1) these two were special, and I have four and a half top tier pacers. So they slot in right after.
I would take prime Ambrose over either. Entire career? They slightly shade him for me.

Why do they rank over Ambrose by career output but not Steyn for you?